Another Human Rights Blog

Friday, 2 May 2014

Women's rights, I believe, is the righteous struggle for gender equality - where men and women are treated equally and without any prejudice based on their gender. Thus, the United Nations has a body called ECOSOC - Economic and Social Council. ECOSOC in turn established a commission to monitor and steer the rights of women in the world in a direction that would protect women from discrimination; to realise gender equality. This commission is perhaps one of the most influential women's rights entities, and is called the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). ECOSOC has referred to the CSW as the "principal global policy-making body" that is "dedicated exclusively to gender equality and [the] advancement of women".

Bearing this in
mind, the United Nations recently elected Sudan, Iran and Pakistan to sit as
‘distinguished members’ on the CSW. Unfortunately, these countries are renowned for heavily
subjugating women in their national legislation and practice.

According to a report
by UNICEF, 12.1 million women in Sudan have suffered the heinously ignorant and
patriarchal malice of female genital mutilation (FGM). Sudanese girls and women
with almost no education are four times more likely to support the continuation
of FGM. The UNICEF report conveyed that FGM takes place across the various
faiths and cultural backgrounds for the purpose of curtailing sexual liberty in
women. This serves to demonstrate that the cause of FGM is more entrenched in the
patriarchal culture of misogyny, rather than any religious command.

Iran’s women’s
rights record is no less disappointing. The Civil Code permits the forceful
marriage of 9 year-old girls to men decades their senior, simply at the
behest of their fathers. There are reports that this practice continues despite the Iranian government having raised the age to 13. The minor has no right to refuse. According to the
disturbing finding of UN Special Rapporteur Coomaraswamy, the inequalities in
law and justice in the Islamic Republic of Iran reveal that should a man find
out his wife has been unfaithful, he is permitted to execute her; however, the
very same legal system will execute a woman who murders her husband if the
situation was reversed. The Iranian Civil Code favours the father over the
mother to take custody of their children in divorce cases. Men may successfully
file for divorce at any time, whereas women may only file for divorce if they
can prove they face physical harm if they continue with the marriage. Men may
control the liberty of their wives by refusing to permit them to accept
employment; women need to obtain written permits from their husbands before
embarking on journeys outside the home.

In Pakistan,
women who report their harrowing experience of rape to the authorities are subject
to a Kafkaesque reversal of justice. They are charged with ‘false accusation’
for failing to present the highly impractical evidential requirement of
four male witnesses, and are subsequently flogged and imprisoned.
The very requirement of four male
witnesses is in itself discriminatory as the testimony of a male is considered
to be worth more than that of a female.

The Convention on the
Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is perhaps the
greatest international legal instrument ever devised to protect and promote the
rights of women in securing gender equality. Pakistan is signatory to CEDAW;
however, the flagrant disregard for the rights of women continues. Iran has
persistently refused to ratify CEDAW, arguing it is in direct conflict with its
Constitution. To many, it may be the logical approach to set the ratification
of CEDAW and its full compliance as the prerequisite for election to sit on the
CSW, or any other women’s rights committee at the UN. However, this sadly is
not the case.

With such prolonged
systematic acts of gender discrimination and the blatant disregard for the rule
of law exhibited by Sudan, Iran and Pakistan, this election strikes an
insulting blow to the victims of gender discrimination, and to the efforts and
advancements made by campaigners of gender equality. The aims promised by the
CSW and ECOSOC have been rendered null and void by such a contradictory act; the
absurdity of electing these gross violators of women’s rights to sit on the key
international women’s rights monitoring body is akin to electing Al-Qaeda to
head an anti-terrorism initiative. The decision-makers in the higher echelons
of the UN should seriously consider seeking and implementing reforms in the
criteria for candidacy to sit on influential human rights bodies.

Sunday, 2 February 2014

More than
40 people were hanged in Iran in the first 22 days of this year, senior United
Nations officials have just revealed. In a report just published on human
rights in Iran, Ahmed Shaheed and Christopher Heyns said there had been a surge
in summary executions in Iran. Those put to death included a number of people
accused of acting against national security. The two UN Special Raporteurs
called on Tehran to put an immediate halt to any further hangings.

According to the UN
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the majority of the
executions were for drug-related offences; however, a number of detainees were
executed for the crime of ‘Moharabeh’ (enmity against God), or acting against
national security. The Iranian Government has in the past used this charge to
execute anti-government protestors, and any other person who publicly criticises
the establishment. The great massacre of 1988 in Iran saw the Ayatollah regime summarily
execute thousands of prisoners over five months for politically opposing the
newly established Islamic regime as a result of the 1979 revolution, and unilaterally
labelled them as members of the MEK, a fundamental Islamic guerrilla
organisation who endorse a Marxist ideology. However, monarchists; socialists
and leftists were also executed, charged by the regime as being MEK members.

The protests following
the disputed 2009 Presidential elections also had its share of arbitrary
arrests, detentions and an on-site shoot to kill policy as fierce reprisal
against those protesting peacefully in the streets. During his Friday prayer
sermon in 2009, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had warned that if the people of
Iran did not end their street protests and return to their homes, the ensuing
“bloodshed and chaos” would be the “opposition leaders’ responsibility”.

In a press release,
Rapporteur Heyns commented “We are dismayed at the continued application of the
death penalty with alarming frequency by the authorities, despite repeated
calls for Iran to establish a moratorium on executions”. Heyns further
commented that “the inherently cruel, inhuman and degrading nature of the death
penalty” demonstrates that the Government is proceeding with executions that
fail to meet the established standard threshold of the ‘most serious crimes’ as
required by international law.

Rapporteur Shaheed expressed
deep concern at the increase in executions of political activists and
individuals from ethnic minority groups, stating “the persistent execution of
individuals for exercising their rights to freedom of assembly, association,
and affiliation to minority groups contravenes universally accepted human
rights principles and norms”.

The Special Rapporteurs
urged the Government of Iran, as an active member of the international
community, to heed the calls for a moratorium on executions, especially in
cases relating to political activists and alleged drug-offences.

“We urge the Iranian
authorities at least to restrict the use of the death penalty to what is
permissible as an exception under international law, and namely to limit its
imposition only for the crime of intentional killing, and to respect
stringently international standards guaranteeing fair trial and due process for
those facing the death penalty”.

Unlike Iran and China,
who have the highest rates of executions in the world, the UK abolished the
imposition of the death penalty ‘in all circumstances’ in 1998; however, the
last execution took place in 1964, where Peter Allen was executed for the
murder of John West. In 1965, Labour MP Sydney Silverman commenced a Bill to
abolish capital punishment, which was passed by both Houses of Parliament. On
24th June, 2013, a Bill titled the ‘Capital Punishment Bill 2013-14’
was presented to Parliament calling for the reinstatement of Capital Punishment
for certain offences. The Bill was sponsored by Mr. Philip Hollobone; however,
it was not discussed and was shortly withdrawn without a view to progressing
further.

As a result of the 13th Protocol to the European Convention
on Human Rights, the UK is prohibited from reinstating capital punishment for
as long as it is party to the Convention.

For many, it is with
relief that the proposed reinstatement of being hanged at the gallows in the UK
was halted and withdrawn; for others, it is a continued concern that the
ceaseless execution of detainees in Iran is increasing.

Washington is currently
in negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear programme; perhaps the
international community will one day negotiate a better human rights record for
a country that descended from the empire of King Cyrus
the Great of Persia, whose ‘Cyrus Cylinder’ bears history's first ever charter of human rights. A replica of the Cyrus Cylinder with the inscription of the charter can be
found above the entrance to the UN Headquarters in New York.

Sunday, 21 July 2013

UN diplomats informed Reuters that Iran intends to fill seats on the Human Rights Council’s 47-member body. The General Assembly’s annual elections for the Geneva- based Human Rights Council will be held later this year in New York. There will be 14 seats available for three-year terms beginning in January 2014.

From the Asia group, which includes the Middle East and Asia, seven countries – China, Iran, Jordan, Maldives, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Vietnam – are vying for four seats, UN diplomats said on condition of anonymity.

With an unrivalled record of human rights violations, for Iran to be successful in gaining a seat on the Human Rights Council would be one of the greatest political failures of the past and present century. Iran has proven to be a country that ruthlessly murders and tortures its own people, most of the times because its ruling body is intolerant of political dissidence. To grant them a place on the Council would be tantamount to rewarding them for their three decades of gross human rights abuses, and act as betrayal to the millions of the victims and their families who have suffered the reign of the intolerant theocracy.

Iran has already been elected to sit on the UN Commission on the Status of Women, despite its appalling gender-discriminative legislation and unofficial abuse of women. The fox guards the proverbial hen-house; and now it appears that the international political community are willing to permit what would be tantamount to the head of a paedophile ring managing the world’s largest orphanage.

The objection is that this is a blatant display of double-standards and should not be accepted by anyone with even half a conscience. It is highly hypocritical for Iran to sit on the Human Rights Council, because they deceitfully claimed at the Human Rights Council’s 2010 Universal Periodic Review in Geneva to have an inspirational human rights record. What could possibly be ‘inspirational’ about raping virgin detainees on the eve of their execution – a previously recorded IRI practice - is beyond any intelligible reasoning. The IRI expresses saint-like behaviour, whilst hiding the perilous abuses of its own people under their theocratic cloak.

According to Human Rights Watch, “Iran falls far short of the most basic standards expected of Human Rights Council members and sticks out even in an overall disappointing pool of candidates in the Asia group, with deeply problematic contenders such as Vietnam, China or Saudi Arabia,”.

The Iranian-Hezbollah strategic partnership has intensified its involvement in Syria – and its complicity in crimes against humanity against the Syrian people – while Syria itself is increasingly an Iranian protectorate. In 2011, Syria attempted to run for a seat on the Council, but withdrew due to pressure from both Western and Arab states. Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government and rebels are locked in an increasingly sectarian civil war that has killed as many as 100,000 people, according to UN figures. For the sanctity of humanity to be preserved before it’s too late, such international pressure needs to be applied again in order to veto the terrorist-supporting and human-rights-discarding Iranian government from gaining a seat on the Council. The roots of their poison ought to be severed before the whole body of the Human Rights Council is infected.

About Me

The gross injustices and violations of human rights are enough to bring anyone's blood to boiling point. Why, then, must we allow ourselves to take a seat as if in a theatre, adopting the role of spectator? One must share information, inspiring action. One must become part of the machine that progresses towards a positive change.